World Families Forums - percentage of norse in Normandy

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 22, 2014, 03:43:54 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  percentage of norse in Normandy
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: percentage of norse in Normandy  (Read 2316 times)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« on: May 22, 2010, 02:58:55 PM »

Wikipedia notes of the Normans:

The Viking contingents who raided, and ultimately settled Normandy and some parts of the Atlantic coast, included Danes, Hiberno-Norse, Orkney Vikings, as well as Anglo-Danes from the English Danelaw, under Viking control.

That is interesting as that implies a largely although not totally Danish origin of the Viking element there.  Rather than look at R1b1b2 clades I wonder if comparing the numbers of other haplogroups like R1a and I in Normandy with Denmark might give some sort of hint at what percentage of the Normandy population are Norse in origin i.e. if R1a was 15% in Denmark but only 1.5% in Normandy then that might imply a 10% input.  Unfortunately yet again the Santiago de Compostella study of French y DNA lets us down by failing to cover Normandy. 

This is of course of interest in terms of L21.  I suspect some of it could be Viking in origin although surely most of it isnt.  A very obvious observation is that L21 looks very high indeed in Normandy but must be much lower in Denmark.  Thoughts??
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2010, 05:46:06 PM »

Years and years ago I read a lot about the Normans, but I am not current on the subject now. I think it is significant that the Normans were speaking French within a few generations of the cession of that land to Hrolf/Rollo by Charles the Simple in 911. So, maybe there weren't ever all that many Vikings in Normandy. It doesn't take too many men under arms to hold sway if the general population is either unarmed or under-armed, especially if the few well-armed men are also well led and organized.

So maybe the population was already mostly L21+ by the time the Vikings got there, and there could have been a few of the Vikings who were themselves L21+.

I haven't seen any signs of R1a in Normandy, which is not to say there isn't any, but it seems pretty scarce thus far. There is a little I1, though. We have a couple of those guys in the Normandy Y-DNA Project:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Normandy/default.aspx?section=yresults
Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2010, 05:24:52 PM »

.....
So maybe the population was already mostly L21+ by the time the Vikings got there, and there could have been a few of the Vikings who were themselves L21+.

I haven't seen any signs of R1a in Normandy, which is not to say there isn't any, but it seems pretty scarce thus far. There is a little I1, though. We have a couple of those guys in the Normandy Y-DNA Project.....
What type of I1's are these Normans as far as Ken Nordtvedt's definitions?  I know he has an "Ultra-Norse", etc., etc., but there also a type or two of Hg I that are probably aboriginal to western Europe too.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2010, 05:41:29 PM »

.....
So maybe the population was already mostly L21+ by the time the Vikings got there, and there could have been a few of the Vikings who were themselves L21+.

I haven't seen any signs of R1a in Normandy, which is not to say there isn't any, but it seems pretty scarce thus far. There is a little I1, though. We have a couple of those guys in the Normandy Y-DNA Project.....
What type of I1's are these Normans as far as Ken Nordtvedt's definitions?  I know he has an "Ultra-Norse", etc., etc., but there also a type or two of Hg I that are probably aboriginal to western Europe too.

I don't know. I haven't checked them against Ken's I1 stuff.

Two of the three have the same surname (Renouf) and match each other 35/37, I think.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2010, 06:18:04 PM »

Wikipedia notes of the Normans:

The Viking contingents who raided, and ultimately settled Normandy and some parts of the Atlantic coast, included Danes, Hiberno-Norse, Orkney Vikings, as well as Anglo-Danes from the English Danelaw, under Viking control.

That is interesting as that implies a largely although not totally Danish origin of the Viking element there.  Rather than look at R1b1b2 clades I wonder if comparing the numbers of other haplogroups like R1a and I in Normandy with Denmark might give some sort of hint at what percentage of the Normandy population are Norse in origin i.e. if R1a was 15% in Denmark but only 1.5% in Normandy then that might imply a 10% input.  Unfortunately yet again the Santiago de Compostella study of French y DNA lets us down by failing to cover Normandy. 

This is of course of interest in terms of L21.  I suspect some of it could be Viking in origin although surely most of it isnt.  A very obvious observation is that L21 looks very high indeed in Normandy but must be much lower in Denmark.  Thoughts??
I am reasonably well read on the issue of Scandinavian settlement in Normandy. I can tell you that historians of Normandy basically fall into two camps, one of which sees the Scandinavians as a thin aristocratic overlay over the existing population, the other argues for a much heavier settlement, including that of a free warrior peasantry. There is evidence that at least some areas of Normandy were devastated and largely depopulated after decades of Viking depredation.

One thing everyone generally agrees on is that the Scandinavians settled primarily in only  part of what later became the Duchy of Normandy. This is clearly illustrated by maps which show the location of Scandinavian placenames in Normandy. In some areas they are quite common, in others non-existent. Mikew once posted a nice map showing the areas where Scandinavian placenames were concentrated on another forum. Perhaps he could do so again here.

Some years ago the French scholar J. Adigard de Gautres made a study of Scandinavian personal names in early Normandy, and found that the vast majority of them were more common in Denmark than in Norway. From this he concluded most of the Vikings there came from Denmark. This seems to be generally accepted. However there is also evidence of a strong Norwegian presence, but primarily in the Cotentin peninsula (La Manche). Most of that probably came from Ireland after Viking setbacks there, and some native Irish seem to have accompanied them.

It should also be kept in mind that Scandinavian settlement in Normandy did not end in 911. It continued for probably another hundred years after that. Some historians contend that many Anglo-Danes went to Normandy from the Danelaw area of England after the St. Brice's Day massacre in 1004.

I vaguely recollect some study which suggested R1a was stronger in Normandy than in the rest of France, but I can't remember where I read it. R1a does however appear to be fairly rare in Denmark. Although I have seen conflicting statistics, Eupedia claims R1a in Denmark is only 12.5 %, with R1b there 44.5%. The same source says R1a and R1b are each 28% of Norway.
Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2010, 06:29:35 PM »

certainly L21 in Normandy is looking huge while to date (I know its problematic) its not looking especially common.  It seems like the reverse may be true of U106.  That in itself suggests that only a small proportions of the people of Normandy are of viking descent.  The lack of R1a compared to R1b1b2 seems to suggest a very different make up too.  As some noted earlier the language disappeared quickly and if you believe the idea that genes and language change are often linked then draw your own conclusions. The linguistic impact of the Franks in France seems similarly very limited.  I think we are talking about aristocratic minorities of a few % or something like that in both cases. Pretty much a guess but it seems likely to me. I believe the Normans and their allies who carved up England only were about 8000 strong and that was enough for them to keep their French language for a long time afterwards and for French to profoundly change the English language.  If anything the Vikings effect on Normandy in terms of language was much less than the Normans impact in England.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2010, 06:45:26 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2010, 04:46:04 AM »

In 2008, I get all the results found on French in ysearch, whose place of origin were known.
I noticed a slight "anomaly" in the rate of haplogroup I1 in Normandy and Brittany.
Is it a coincidence because of a lack of sample?
In any case, only the departments close to the Channel had a above average  than in the French average (exept departement of Manche), while departments of the interior of Brittany and Normandy were close to 0!
Here is my message of 2008 put on another forum:


I thought until now it was impossible to know what was the impact of genetic Viking invasions in Normandy.
But in analyzing the sample data on french dna in ysearch, I found a few things that could be interesting with haplogroup I1
The haplogroup I1, is over 30% in scandinavia.
The haplogroup I1, is nearly 10% in the north-west of France while in the rest of France, the rate is around 5% (except in Alsace where the rate is also 10%)

If we examine more closely the situation in the north-west:
At the regional level:
Bretagne: I1: 15% (3 / 20)
Bsse Normandie: I1: 9% (2 / 22)
Hte Normandie: I1: 10.5% (2 / 19)

At the level of departments:
Calvados (Bsse Normandie): 33% (2 / 6)
Ille et Vilaine (Bretagne): 33% (2 / 6)
Cotes d'Armor (Bretagne) 20% (1 / 5)
Seine Maritime (Hte Normandie): 12% (2 / 17)

Manche (Bsse Normandie): 0% (0 / 4)
Orne (Bsse Normandie): 0% (0 / 12)
Finistère (Bretagne): 0% (0 / 7)
Morbihan (Bretagne): 0% (0 / 1)

The low number of sample is problematic but if we assemble all departments bordering the English Channel (where the Viking presence has been strongest)
we get 18% (7 / 38) which is not bad!

If in these regions, the rate is around 10% higher than the rest of France, if it comes from the invasion wiking and as haplogroup I1 is at 33% in scandinavie, then we must believe that in regions near to the English Channel in France, half of male ancestors of these people were vikings!!!
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2010, 11:16:21 AM »

... One thing everyone generally agrees on is that the Scandinavians settled primarily in only  part of what later became the Duchy of Normandy. This is clearly illustrated by maps which show the location of Scandinavian placenames in Normandy. In some areas they are quite common, in others non-existent. Mikew once posted a nice map showing the areas where Scandinavian placenames were concentrated on another forum. Perhaps he could do so again here.  ...
I actually don't remember posting this but I have seen this.  I don't know anything about the veracity of this web site but this is an interesting map.
http://www.viking.no/e/france/place_name_map.html

The Normans are something of an unusual bunch.  If they had input from Anglo-Danes and Hiberno-Norse (Ostmen) then the Anglo-Normans of the 11th and 12th centuries may have just been the latest version of invader/exiles.  That's not even adding in the Bretons who have have been Britons returning home.

Perhaps Normandy was just a way station to rest up after a loss to get back across the Channel and kick the latest victors out.

« Last Edit: May 24, 2010, 11:17:02 AM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2010, 03:40:22 PM »

certainly L21 in Normandy is looking huge while to date (I know its problematic) its not looking especially common.  It seems like the reverse may be true of U106.  That in itself suggests that only a small proportions of the people of Normandy are of viking descent.  The lack of R1a compared to R1b1b2 seems to suggest a very different make up too.  As some noted earlier the language disappeared quickly and if you believe the idea that genes and language change are often linked then draw your own conclusions. The linguistic impact of the Franks in France seems similarly very limited.  I think we are talking about aristocratic minorities of a few % or something like that in both cases. Pretty much a guess but it seems likely to me. I believe the Normans and their allies who carved up England only were about 8000 strong and that was enough for them to keep their French language for a long time afterwards and for French to profoundly change the English language.  If anything the Vikings effect on Normandy in terms of language was much less than the Normans impact in England.
I think it is just as much an error to underestimate the Scandinavian settlement in Normandy as it is to overestimate it. The place-name evidence alone suggests it was fairly dense in some areas.

Yes, the Scandinavian language largely disappeared after several generations, but it persisted much longer in the west around Bayeux than in the eastern area around Rouen, an area known to have had dense Scandinavian settlement.  One reason for its disappearance may be that the Scandinavian settlement seems to have been composed almost exclusively of males, with very few females. Thus they would have needed to take local women for spouses. Also the Scandinavian language was associated with paganism, and French with Christianity, so when the Vikings adopted Christianity there may have been an impetus to adopt the French language along with it.

However there is ample evidence to suggest that the Scandinavians did not constitute just a thin aristocratic overlay. Consider this: there are a number of words of Scandinavian origin in the dialect of Normandy today which relate to boats and fishing, hardly the usual occupation of aristocrats.

Since most of the Vikings in Normandy came from Denmark, where R1a is fairly rare, I can't see why the percentage of R1a in Normandy today should be all that crucial. But in any case, I don't think we have a real idea of just how common it is there anyway.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2010, 03:42:38 PM »

... One thing everyone generally agrees on is that the Scandinavians settled primarily in only  part of what later became the Duchy of Normandy. This is clearly illustrated by maps which show the location of Scandinavian placenames in Normandy. In some areas they are quite common, in others non-existent. Mikew once posted a nice map showing the areas where Scandinavian placenames were concentrated on another forum. Perhaps he could do so again here.  ...
I actually don't remember posting this but I have seen this.  I don't know anything about the veracity of this web site but this is an interesting map.
http://www.viking.no/e/france/place_name_map.html

The Normans are something of an unusual bunch.  If they had input from Anglo-Danes and Hiberno-Norse (Ostmen) then the Anglo-Normans of the 11th and 12th centuries may have just been the latest version of invader/exiles.  That's not even adding in the Bretons who have have been Britons returning home.

Perhaps Normandy was just a way station to rest up after a loss to get back across the Channel and kick the latest victors out.


Yes, that's the map I had in mind. Thanks for posting it.
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.119 seconds with 19 queries.